Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 340

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 84 of the 84 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive and Usability Issues in Geovisualization

Open access
Slocum, Terry A., Blok, Connie, Jiang, Bin, Koussoulakou, Alexandra, Montello, Daniel R., Fuhrmann, Sven, Hedley, Nicholas R.·2001·Cartography and Geographic Information Science

Abstract

We provide a research agenda for the International Cartographic Association's Commission on Visualization and Virtual Environment Working Group on Cognitive and Usability Issues in Geovisualization. Developments in hardware and software have led to (and will continue to stimulate) numerous novel methods for visualizing geospatial data. It is our belief that these novel methods will be of little use if they are not developed within a theoretical cognitive framework and iteratively tested using usability engineering principles. We argue that cognitive and usability issues should be considered in the context of six major research themes: 1) geospatial virtual environments (GeoVEs); 2) dynamic representations (including animated and interactive maps); 3) metaphors and schemata in user interface design; 4) individual and group differences; 5) collaborative geovisualization; and 6) evaluating the effectiveness of geovisualization methods. A key point underlying our use of theoretical cognitive principles is that traditional cognitive theory for static two-dimensional maps may not be applicable to interactive three-dimensional immersive GeoVEs and dynamic representations—thus new cognitive theory may need to be developed. Usability engineering extends beyond the traditional cartographic practice of "user testing" by evaluating software effectiveness throughout a lifecycle (including design, development, and deployment). Applying usability engineering to geovisualization, however, may be problematic because of the novelty of geovisualization and the associated difficulty of defining the nature of users and their tasks. Tackling the research themes is likely to require an interdisciplinary effort involving geographic information scientists, cognitive scientists, usability engineers, computer scientists, and others.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1559/152304001782173998

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 84 references

Cited by

See all 340

Metadata

Authors
Slocum, T. A., Blok, C., Jiang, B., Koussoulakou, A., Montello, D. R., Fuhrmann, S., & Hedley, N. R.
Venue
Cartography and Geographic Information Science
Published
2001-01
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
61-75
ISSN
  • 1523-0406 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-0465
OpenAlex
W2082317465
Cited by
340
References
84
FWCI
16.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cognitive and Usability Issues in Geovisualization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1559/152304001782173998
The paper
Slocum, T. A., Blok, C., Jiang, B., Koussoulakou, A., Montello, D. R., Fuhrmann, S., & Hedley, N. R. (2001). Cognitive and Usability Issues in Geovisualization. Cartography and Geographic Information Science. https://doi.org/10.1559/152304001782173998

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.